• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
CapelDodger said:
"Good faith" : there's the rub. Things done in good faith are commonly done in the open. What Mr. Trump, Rudi and the Three Amigos got up to was done far from the light of day.
Click to expand...
But then they basically admitted it anyway. If only there was some way to compel their testimony under oath ... I'm sure they'd jump at the chance.
 
PhantomWolf said:
I have to admit that I would be less likely to push for an Article on delaying the Security Assistance, mostly because there are too many outs, too many reasons that were being given, and no 100% smoking gun of Trump demanding that it be withheld because of the the Investigations.

However, it is entirely clear that Trump was "selling" a meeting at the Whitehouse for the investigations into the 2016 CT and Burisma, and it's become clear that while it was kept close to the chest that "Burisma" was code for the Bidens. And it is also clear that the Ukrainians have never gotten that promised meeting.

This selling of the services of the Office of President for something of personal gain, and that by itself should be enough to impeach.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Both have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The timing of events make it absurd to argue against it in good faith.
 
Last edited:
Minoosh said:
I’m trying to decide if obstruction of justice applies in a political process, i.e. impeachment. Is it considered judicial? At the Senate level a judge presides, so it’s at least quasi-judicial. The House is at a stage now that’s no longer analogous to a grand jury proceeding, but nor is it a trial.

I have not been watching testimony. Is this pretty much it for the Ukraine situation? Are more closed-door interviews going to be held on other issues?

I think the past couple of weeks have been good for the country. I’m not really an optimist, but these hearings have struck me as somewhat ... cathartic? The public airing of grievances, complete with Trump’s refusal to “let” certain firsthand witnesses testify, IMO say something about a commitment to at least the appearance of transparency. I’m sure there’s plenty of stuff that isn’t being made public, but I think it’s kind of cool that so much scintillating dialogue has been taking place live on C-SPAN. I’m 100 percent sincere.
Click to expand...

Obstruction of justice was the principle charge against Nixon. Being smarter than Trump, and having the advice of Republicans smarter than the current crop, he resigned.
 
Trebuchet said:
Obstruction of justice was the principle charge against Nixon. Being smarter than Trump, and having the advice of Republicans smarter than the current crop, he resigned.
Click to expand...
It's not down to smarts. It's down to how far politicians are willing to prioritize partisan politics over the law. As it stands right now, there's every chance the House will vote to impeach accompanied by evidence that would ensure a conviction in a real court and the Senate will take that evidence, dismiss it, and vote along party lines to acquit. And unless every Republican Senator up for reelection in 2020 loses their job, they will tell us that they did the right thing.
 
acbytesla said:
I disagree. Both have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The timing of events make it absurd to argue against it in good faith.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that it didn't happen, I think that it did, but it is harder to prove that it did. There are a lot of other reasons that the money could have been held up, and regardless of how credible they are, or aren't, the Republicans will hold them up as the "real reason" it was delayed. Also there is no absolute proof that it was, rather a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing towards it, and a lot of people believing it was held up because of that.

Whereas with the WH Meeting, there are none of those issues. It was held up and never given, there are a lot of people saying that the investigations were absolutely required for getting that meeting. The Ukrainians knew that to get the WH Meeting they had to announce the investigations, and there was a lot of work that was done to get a statement done, and there is no argument that the requirements for the WH Meeting were directly attributable to Trump.

The hold on the aid might be the "worst" of the two offences, but the case for the Meeting is the far stronger of the two.
 
Minoosh said:
But then they basically admitted it anyway. If only there was some way to compel their testimony under oath ... I'm sure they'd jump at the chance.
Click to expand...
No evidence to the contrary from Trump, he must still be strongly considering giving evidence himself under oath. Just as the Barr investigation into the deep state is strongly ongoing (no evidence to the contrary). There was no need to confect a Ukrainian investigation into the DNC Server because there's a perfectly good ongoing investigation right there at home. It even has George Soros in there, so just whose bright idea was it to get this ball rolling in the first place? (Let's recall that Trump doesn't originate ideas, he just presents a distorted reflection of those delivered to him.)

Step forward Rudi. Barr's investigation wasn't good enough for him, because where's his name in it? Nowhere. A Ukrainian investigation would cover him in glory, and show how clever he is (and Trump must be for recognising its value). Rudi's problem is that he's not half as clever as he used to be, and has never been half as clever as he thought he was.
 
Last edited:
portlandatheist said:
Shouldn't contempt of congress, who has the sole power of the purse, be in this list? I know that aid can be suspended or delayed for various reasons but this had no good faith reasons to obstruct the will of congress.
Click to expand...

I didn't so much leave it off, as got weary of researching the US Codes for all the the criminal acts Trump has been committing.. the six I listed ought to be enough for anyone. If others want to add to that list, have at it!

Those six are all clearly much worse than anything Richard M. Nixon did, and not only rise to, but greatly exceed the level required for that impeachment. When are the Repugnicans in the House and Senate going to publicly recognize that they have a recidivist criminal mob-boss in the White House? The answer is, never, so long as pretending the Emperor is wearing clothes is to their own personal and political advantage.

If there was a sudden shift in the needle, that looked like becoming an overwhelming call to impeach Trump, they would turn on him in a heartbeat.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
I'm not saying that it didn't happen, I think that it did, but it is harder to prove that it did. There are a lot of other reasons that the money could have been held up, and regardless of how credible they are, or aren't, the Republicans will hold them up as the "real reason" it was delayed. Also there is no absolute proof that it was, rather a lot of circumstantial evidence pointing towards it, and a lot of people believing it was held up because of that.

Whereas with the WH Meeting, there are none of those issues. It was held up and never given, there are a lot of people saying that the investigations were absolutely required for getting that meeting. The Ukrainians knew that to get the WH Meeting they had to announce the investigations, and there was a lot of work that was done to get a statement done, and there is no argument that the requirements for the WH Meeting were directly attributable to Trump.

The hold on the aid might be the "worst" of the two offences, but the case for the Meeting is the far stronger of the two.
Click to expand...

Ohhhhh, You're thinking that the Republicans might do the right thing. How precious.

I said "beyond a reasonable doubt". The Republicans are not being reasonable or acting in good faith in any way. I now expect the GOP majority Senate to use the impeachment trial to promote all kinds of conspiracy theories and just go after the Democrats. I expect the Senate trial to be more focused on Biden and the traitorous civil servants than on the Ukraine and the Trump administration's bribery solicitation.
 
smartcooky said:
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."
- George Carlin
Click to expand...

Careful, smartcooky. You'll be accused of directing this at members of the forum in order to get around the rules of direct personal attacks.
 
Last edited:
quadraginta said:
This is an interesting proposition. That the act of quoting a person is, a priori, presenting that person as "an authority".
Click to expand...
And this is the fundamental mistake he's forced to defend as a means of strawmanning his opponent so he doesn't have to back down from insulting a fellow poster's dead mother.

Congratulations, theprestige, you Bobbed yourself.
 
smartcooky said:
I didn't so much leave it off, as got weary of researching the US Codes for all the the criminal acts Trump has been committing.. the six I listed ought to be enough for anyone. If others want to add to that list, have at it!

Those six are all clearly much worse than anything Richard M. Nixon did, and not only rise to, but greatly exceed the level required for that impeachment. When are the Repugnicans in the House and Senate going to publicly recognize that they have a recidivist criminal mob-boss in the White House? The answer is, never, so long as pretending the Emperor is wearing clothes is to their own personal and political advantage.

If there was a sudden shift in the needle, that looked like becoming an overwhelming call to impeach Trump, they would turn on him in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the polls are not looking to good right now. I sincerely hope that changes
 
Last edited:
Trebuchet said:
Obstruction of justice was the principle charge against Nixon. Being smarter than Trump, and having the advice of Republicans smarter than the current crop, he resigned.
Click to expand...
He was tougher than Trump, too. And probably at some point commanded more personal loyalty than Trump, though much of that that went south eventually.

But there were tapes.
 
Trebuchet said:
Obstruction of justice was the principle charge against Nixon. Being smarter than Trump, and having the advice of Republicans smarter than the current crop, he resigned.
Click to expand...


Things were much worse for him. He was confronted by a Senate with a measurable fraction of GOP members who still retained a shred or two of personal integrity.

This is not a consideration which Trump need concern himself with.

If, through some unlikely series of events the current crop of GOP Senators feel themselves to be threatened by Trump's continued presence in the White House, then he'll have something to worry about.

They'll turn on him like cornered rats.

That's one of the downsides of having to depend on associates without even a shred of personal integrity.
 
dudalb said:
I have no hesistation in saying the argument that impeachment is not part of the checks and balances system in the constitution is a stupid argument.
Click to expand...
Among the crazier things I've seen in the last three years: Loads of people arguing that the constitutional passages establishing the Electoral College are completely justified in overturning the popular vote, but the constitutional passages establishing the impeachment process are not justified in overturning the Electoral College.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom